Pro Style Offense Questions

[hawkwing]

I realize there are a lot of very smart football minds here, and I'm unsure on a couple things so I was hoping you could enlighten me.

Which teams currently in the NCAA run the traditional Pro Style offense that Ty Detmer has said he wants to implement?

How long have they run them?

What has been their record for the years they've run it?

I would like to learn more about the Pro Style offense and who's using it now and how successful it has been.

[snoscythe]

Top-of-the-head short list:

Alabama
Ohio State
Michigan
Duke
USC
Maryland
Stanford
K-State
Penn State?

[TulaneVandyRiceCoug]

Vanderbilt's D, which I think is respectable, was helpless against the Bama pro offense. I don't think the physical talent difference was that special.

[Woody3715]

Wisconsin has run the Pro Style Offense since Barry Alvarez arrived as coach in 1990.

[cougarnerd]

I can see a few of those teams. Others (and I am not saying they're not pro-style) I just can't remember them using TEs as much.

On the other hand, Clemson last year had a TE they used a lot, though DeShaun Watson's athleticism was used more in a spread than pro-style offense.

[YNot]

I can see a few of those teams. Others (and I am not saying they're not pro-style) I just can't remember them using TEs as much.

On the other hand, Clemson last year had a TE they used a lot, though DeShaun Watson's athleticism was used more in a spread than pro-style offense.

We have recently played Michigan, Wisconsin (x2), and Notre Dame (x2) that ran pro style offenses. We lost every single game - 3 were close in score, but only in the '12 Notre Dame game did BYU really have a chance at the win.

These pro style offenses each gained about 250 rushing yards (usually multiple RBs with decent games) and had about 195-225 passing yards. Ball control offense with usually about 70-75 offensive plays per game. No huge passing game needed, though I note that excellent TEs like Eiffert, Butt, and Fumagalli had nice catches against BYU.

[YNot]

Despite that horrible scene on the field this year, I continue to believe that BYU's best potential to be a *real* contender is to play pro style, ball control offense. We can recruit offensive linemen and solid running backs and tight ends, solid pocket quarterbacks, and good-enough receivers. We cannot consistently recruit for the spread offense like Clemson, Oregon, Washington, etc. We were spoiled by Taysom's athleticism. That's not the type of quarterback that BYU can easily recruit.

If we want to run the Anae offense, we can beat the occasional P5 team (at about a 40% victory margin) and can beat most MWC/AAC level teams (at about a 80% margin). BYU could finish ranked in that system, with the right schedule, but BYU would be more of a pretender (with a nice and shiny win-loss record behind a weaker schedule) than a true contender.

For me, the glaring weaknesses in this year's offense are:

1) Quarterback play - decision-making and executing the throws. Dye was open on that little delay route all game - ESPECIALLY on 3rd down. Didn't start hitting him until the second half, when we were playing catch-up. Different game against Boise if Mangum hits Dye for big 3rd down conversions in the 2nd quarter. Mangum focuses too much on his #1 route and forces way too many throws, often into double coverage. He has been lucky and completed some forced throws - but has also resulted in too many interceptions and tons of (lucky) incomplete passes.

2) Fumbles - killed us against Utah St. and we were fortunate that lost fumble turnovers weren't a huge problem against Boise St.

[frdbtr]

This has nothing to do with the type of offense BYU runs. Pro style, spread, option, it doesn't matter. BYU is losing games right now because the current coaching staff isn't preparing the players correctly in order to get them ready to win games. This has nothing to do with style, it is about coaching.

[hawkwing]

From my research it looks to me like pro style offenses are very up and down teams based a lot on the intelligence of the QB they happen to have.

[Woody3715]

From my research it looks to me like pro style offenses are very up and down teams based a lot on the intelligence of the QB they happen to have.

What's your definition of up and down? 0 losses to 3 losses? I don't think any of the following teams are "up and down teams". Each of these teams typically has a very high % of red zone possessions for TDs. Why? Because every year each of these teams has a very good OL and can run the ball!

Alabama
Ohio State
Michigan
Wisconsin
USC
Stanford
Penn State

Each of these also dominates time of possession which wears out the opponent's defense and keeps their own D off the field.